Yes, it is understandable that Daniel was treated a little differently. But the king and the royal court treated Jonas and Emma the same way. Just after Sofia came into the picture everything changed. Daniel, Emma and Jonas couldn't spend the Christmas Eve at the Royal Palace with Victoria, Carl Philip and Madeleine on Christmas 2008 (two months before Victoria and Daniel got engaged), because "only the family celebrates the Christmas Eve together", said Nina Eldh, who was then the director of the press department. But Sofia has been invited to christening, funeral and weddings of the royal family members.

That can be seen as a bit apples and oranges.

Daniel didn't attend Christmas Eve celebrations because he wasn't family. Has Sofia attended Christmas Eve celebrations? If she has, then she's being held to a different standard.

Did Daniel attend any christenings, funerals, or weddings pre-engagement (if there were any)? The argument can be made that these types of events aren't for just the family, and that's the difference.

What I find "ridiculous" is that the king is apparently willing to welcome SH with open arms, but opposed Daniel Westling for so many years??

Some people are able to learn from the past and move forward. Others remain stuck in the past. HM is obviously able to move forward.

Also there more than a few people on these boards who found Daniel wanting in terms of his qualifications to become consort to the heir to the throne and said he definitely did not measure up when compared to Jonas or to Victoria's previous boyfriend so HM was not alone if he really had any doubts about Daniel.

Me also - the reality series participation and what the premise of that show was makes my skin crawl. I am not old fashioned, Victorian, a prude, a spinster, an old maid, not even that old age wise, I do leave my house, I have dated when I was younger and am now married so please no one think I am an "old fogey" who sits in her rocking chair cackling madly about all of these young whippersnappers LOL

Finally someone who gets it ! I feel the same way. Im not saying burn her at the stake. Im just saying I don't admire her obvious Kardashian ways. Lol

AMEN!

There are limits, there have to be limits, and this is a point where limits have to be set. Let CP go off in the sunset with his bikini babe, but don't let her represent the nation as a newly minted princess and diplomatically recognized head of state if she goes to international conventions.

Another option would be that she is not a princess, but ends up being a Baroness and then be there only when CP is, no more and no less. No independent agenda, no personal crusades, no going off on jaunts to UN conventions/meetings and no meeting heads of state in her own right.

Either way, there should be a consequence and condition either way. She has no business getting an "HRH" and if, despite Mabel's many accomplishments, Friso had to renounce his place in the succession to marry her, CP should be expected to renounce or lower his rank.

There are limits, there have to be limits, and this is a point where limits have to be set. Let CP go off in the sunset with his bikini babe, but don't let her represent the nation as a newly minted princess and diplomatically recognized head of state if she goes to international conventions.

Another option would be that she is not a princess, but ends up being a Baroness and then be there only when CP is, no more and no less. No independent agenda, no personal crusades, no going off on jaunts to UN conventions/meetings and no meeting heads of state in her own right.

Either way, there should be a consequence and condition either way. She has no business getting an "HRH" and if, despite Mabel's many accomplishments, Friso had to renounce his place in the succession to marry her, CP should be expected to renounce or lower his rank.

I honestly find your stance that Sofia's past be used to significantly hamper her future options shortsighted.

First of all- Sofia will never be recognized as a head of state any more than Carl Philip will because neither of them will EVER be a head of state. That honor will go to Victoria, and then Estelle.

Second, the idea that because Sofia worked as a nude model she's unworthy of being accorded the rights that would normally come with marriage to a Prince- that seems to me to be a modern version of the Scarlet A. Pin it on her and make sure she knows she's not good enough and not worthy to be treated as equal to her husband. I find that idea archaic and overly judgmental.

Third, Mabel married into a different royal family and- and this is important- the decision that Friso should renounce to marry her did not come from the royal family and came about under totally different circumstances.

There are limits, there have to be limits, and this is a point where limits have to be set. Let CP go off in the sunset with his bikini babe, but don't let her represent the nation as a newly minted princess and diplomatically recognized head of state if she goes to international conventions.

Another option would be that she is not a princess, but ends up being a Baroness and then be there only when CP is, no more and no less. No independent agenda, no personal crusades, no going off on jaunts to UN conventions/meetings and no meeting heads of state in her own right.

Either way, there should be a consequence and condition either way. She has no business getting an "HRH" and if, despite Mabel's many accomplishments, Friso had to renounce his place in the succession to marry her, CP should be expected to renounce or lower his rank.

Exactly! What people fail to realize is that people aren't saying he can't have his Kardashian. Just let het remain a private subject so she can do all the reality shows and porn make out sessions she wants. Without the HRH...

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrownPrincess5

The bottom line is Sofia can marry CP, but she should not have the princess title.

Exactly no HRH for her. To be completely honest not even a noble title like Baroness just a Mrs will suffice: )

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ish

Except Sweden no longer practices morganatic marriages. Which means that if she marries CP people are going to have to suck it up because she'll be a princess.

The Scandinavian royal families are some of the most respected in Europe. If things happens people may suck it up but i think it may weaken the dynasty in the long run. What do you think? :)

Daniel didn't attend Christmas Eve celebrations because he wasn't family. Has Sofia attended Christmas Eve celebrations? If she has, then she's being held to a different standard.

Did Daniel attend any christenings, funerals, or weddings pre-engagement (if there were any)? The argument can be made that these types of events aren't for just the family, and that's the difference.

Well, at least in my family the longtime boy- and girlfriends have been a part of the family.
Even though Sofia and Carl Philip aren't engaged, Sofia has attended at the official state events which were also family events: Estelle's christening, Lilian's funeral and Madeleine's banns of marriage and wedding. Daniel was allowed to attend with Victoria in 2008 to Frederik's 40th party in Denmark, but that was a private party. Daniel, Emma and Jonas haven't attended at family events: they weren't at the 95th birthday of count Lennart Bernadotte in 2004 or at queen Silvia's brother Jörg's funeral in 2006 or the 70th birthday of princess Birgitta in 2007. They could attend at the private 30th birthday parties of Gustaf and Oscar Magnuson.

Except Sweden no longer practices morganatic marriages. Which means that if she marries CP people are going to have to suck it up because she'll be a princess.

For how long?

How much do people ahve to put up with?

Why is it that the Swedes (along with every other nation with a monarchy) have to put up with these walking soap opera dramas in the form of women that these princes want to marry? Aren't there limits to waht the taxpayers should have to pay for?

You know, the next time people bellyache about people on welfare, I'll make it a point to remind them (if I'm in Europe) that people on welfare don't live half as well as these 'fairytale princesses' and these princesses come from backgrounds that are just the same as those who whine about the behavior of people on welfare.

Why is it that the Swedes (along with every other nation with a monarchy) have to put up with these walking soap opera dramas in the form of women that these princes want to marry? Aren't there limits to waht the taxpayers should have to pay for?

You know, the next time people bellyache about people on welfare, I'll make it a point to remind them (if I'm in Europe) that people on welfare don't live half as well as these 'fairytale princesses' and these princesses come from backgrounds that are just the same as those who whine about the behavior of people on welfare.

You do realize that Sweden has a robust social safety net, and one of the highest standards of living in the world right? Somehow I doubt there's a lot of "bellyaching about people on welfare" in a country with as much income equality as Sweden has.

You're applying U.S. politics to Sweden in a way that doesn't apply.

Also, should the taxpayers in Sweden become discontent with the monarchy, I'm sure polling will reflect that, but at the moment, the monarchy appears to still be popular, and in good hands with Crown Princess Victoria, and there's no reason on earth the third in line (who is likely to move down more) shouldn't marry the person he chooses.

And considering how liberal Sweden is and how focused on equality- I can't see the Swedish people demanding someone marrying into the royal family be denied a title because she once posed nude.

Why is it that the Swedes (along with every other nation with a monarchy) have to put up with these walking soap opera dramas in the form of women that these princes want to marry? Aren't there limits to waht the taxpayers should have to pay for?

You know, the next time people bellyache about people on welfare, I'll make it a point to remind them (if I'm in Europe) that people on welfare don't live half as well as these 'fairytale princesses' and these princesses come from backgrounds that are just the same as those who whine about the behavior of people on welfare.

Oh God...

On average the Swedish taxpayer is paying $1.82 annually for the monarchy. Half of that is for palace administration, so only 91 cents per person is going towards funding the lives of the Swedish royals. I kind of think that the 91 cents isn't really enough for people to complain nearly as much as they are about Sofia.

Sofia is a woman who rose to fame because she was a model. The nature of her modelling really is irrelevant; she became famous because she was a model. She did a reality TV show because hey, that's what famous people do these days. Yes it was a sleazy one, but most reality TV shows are kind of sleazy. She does not owe anyone an apology for her actions, nor does she have to say that she did anything wrong because, regardless of how you feel about them, adults consenting to have sexually suggestive naked pictures of them taken is not against the law in Sweden. Nor is appearing in sleazy reality TV shows. Sofia may at this point in her life regret those choices she made, or she may not. Given as she is no longer modeling or appearing in reality TV shows I think it's safe to say it's kind of time to move on from her past.

However, people aren't willing to do such. They're hung up on actions that Sofia did at a minimum of three years ago simply because Sofia's actions don't mesh with their personal morals regarding sex, sexuality, and nudity. I'm not saying that the people who oppose Sofia are prudes - that's a sweeping statement - but I am saying that they're condemning her for her behaviour simply because it doesn't match up with their morals. We live in a world where slut shaming exists, and Sofia is being slut shamed. Unfortunately for every royal watcher who hates her, she - along with CP and the SRF - appears to be ignoring the shaming.

What's more is that they're blatantly disregarding any attempt she makes to move on from that. Her charity work is written off not as her actually trying to do charity work but as her trying to make herself look good because she's almost a royal - the fact that many other royal brides didn't necessarily do all that much charity work pre-relationship is considered irrelevant. When she appears at an event she's condemned for smiling at the cameras - if anyone royal smiles at a camera people applaud because they're smiling, but not Sofia. When something happens with her charities people instantly jump to the worst conclusions and condemn her for her actions.

For example, not all that long ago someone found a photo of a group of South African girls from Sofia's charity Project Playground. The girls were set to appear on a South African TV show and the costumes were revealing. Instantly Sofia was slandered as trying to expose young girls - who themselves were already at risk of rape - to sex and reality tv. This was regardless of the fact that

If you look at Project Playground's website you'll see that they're already well aware of the likelihood that the children they work with, regardless of gender, are at risk of being raped,

No where on the website did it say that Sofia had any part in deciding that the girls would be involved in the show, selecting which girls would appear on the show, or selecting the costume itself

A search of the internet indicates that at minimum the costume selected is a cultural dress, and that attitudes towards female nudity are different in South Africa

The show itself was a religious, educational, children's show aimed at improving morality in South Africa.

This shows that people don't actually care what Sofia does. They've made up their minds about her and regardless of how much she tries to move forward and change her life, people are too hung up on the fact that she's comfortable enough with her body to appear nude.

Really, if you think about it, the attitudes towards Sofia are no different than the way that teenage bullys treat girls who so often end up committing suicide. I have to say that HRHHermione is right; Sofia is an amazing role model for these types of girls because she's showing that you don't have to be ashamed of your body, you don't have to be ashamed of your sexuality, and you can rise above and ignore the relentless comments of petty people.

The Scandinavian royal families are some of the most respected in Europe. If things happens people may suck it up but i think it may weaken the dynasty in the long run. What do you think? :)

I think if a dynasty that is, in your words, one of the most respected royal families in Europe, can be weakened in the long run because a royal who is not in the direct line of succession married a woman with a well publicized past, then I would question just how respected and strong they were to begin with.

Royal families have survived scandals far worse than a woman like Sofia Hellqvist.

What most bothers me in Project Playground is that Sofia Hellqvist gets all the credit, while Frida Vesterberg runs the daily work in South Africa. If PP does something right (I don't know if it does), it is because of Frida.

Good; I understand that point, but come on, why be called narrow minded because someone is disgusted with the lifestyle choices of someone else? Sweden is flush with money, so why would Sofia willingly take that lifestyle she's chosen and why should she be foisted onto the public and have the public and Sweden's courtiers not just tolerate her, but be forced to like her as well? Why should the public pay for her to end up with a solid lifestyle at a royal level just because CP loves her? If she ends up married to him, she'll end up with a title of princess of Sweden and I don't think she's suitable for any role that is officially expected to be recognized on the world stage?

She will have that status; she will be an "HRH," have a passport that enables her to get past normal regulations, be able ot stay in the world's best hotels without worrying about the bills and be entitled to be welcomed by the leading officials of the area she stops off in. Throw in the jewels and couture and to me it's a singular slap in the face to any woman who chose an honest working life rather than vamp it up for men's magazines and end up making out with porn stars. After the usual PR campaign of her being repentant of her life (and all the rest of that usual drivel) the public will be expected to applaud and forgive and forget.

What most bothers me in Project Playground is that Sofia Hellqvist gets all the credit, while Frida Vesterberg runs the daily work in South Africa. If PP does something right (I don't know if it does), it is because of Frida.

I feel the same,but it seems to be a very common thing for celebrities nowadays...I know there are lots of great people who do admirable work for all sorts of philantropic causes or donate a lot of money but there are some celebrities who are just lending their face & name to the cause for getting good PR.
Of course there are some noteworthy exceptions of famous people who are really involved in the charity they represent, but I still find it awful when a few people believe it is ok to use disadvantaged people for generating positive media feedback. We have an old saying that goes "Do good deeds but don´t talk about it!"

__________________

__________________Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.
Avoiding danger in the long run is no safer than outright exposure.
Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing. Helen Keller